[mou] Re: [mnbird] About stress on the Great Grey and otherowls
Ron Green
rongreen@charter.net
Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:30:14 -0600
Comment from a neophyte.
First, I must admit, I fall lamentably short of the level of experience many
of you have who are posting on this forum. Secondly, even though I would be
classified as an experienced photographer, the discussions here have helped
me realize that I was sorely lacking education in a number of critical
areas. So, now when I take my second trip up to Duluth and Sax/Zim this
week, I feel better armed to be more respectful and less intrusive on both
the animals and people who live in the area. So education made the
difference in my thinking and choices, not the witholding or limiting of
information. So my recommendation is to use education as your primary means
to change behavior.
Ron Green
http://www.greensphotoimages.com/gallery
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Fagyal" <Chris.Fagyal@udlp.com>
To: <mou-net@cbs.umn.edu>; <mnbird@lists.mnbird.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 7:31 AM
Subject: [mou] Re: [mnbird] About stress on the Great Grey and otherowls
> I think the last sentence below in Laura's post is right on. I'm a
> little (well more than a little) perturbed at these (this is the second
> time this same topic has been initiated by the same person) posts. I've
> yet to flush any Great Grey Owls in any of my trips up north. If we
> should "stop going to see the owls again and again", maybe we should
> stop pishing for Boreal Chickadees as well. We should probably also
> stop pishing for warblers in the summer, or other passerines during
> their migration. We should stop viewing shorebirds in the spring, and
> hawks in the fall. We certainly don't want to stress anyone or anything
> out do we? Hell lets just stop birding.
>
> All it takes is a little knowledge, a little common sense, some
> respect, and a little intelligence to be able to go birding and have
> little to no impact on the birds. Turning off ones engine when near an
> Owl is a good example. I was with a Great Grey in Sax-Zim on Friday
> afternoon for 30+ minutes. I left my engine off the whole time (froze
> my rear end too), and the owl went around to three different perches in
> the same corner where I was, and hunted, and never even paid me any
> heed. He never flew from any perch because of me, and he never stopped
> hunting, nor did he ever fly away. A couple pulled up a few mins later
> that I didn't recognize, and left their engine running. After a few
> moments of the Owl staring directly at them, I told them to "turn the
> engine off". The lady got irritated at me and they just left. I guess
> they didn't realize how Great Greys hunt. After i'd spent time with
> this lovely Owl, I left it on the same branch on the same tree that I
> found it on, still hunting. I guess I stressed it out....just as much
> as a deer walking by would have, as thats about as much noise as I made
> the entire time I was there.
>
> You want mention of the people who go look at owls again and again, ok
> here is a mention of one of those people. I've been up there the
> following dates and times:
> Thanksgiving from 7:45am to 4:20pm
> 12/11 from 7:45am to 3:30pm
> 1/7 from 2:20pm to 4:50pm
> 1/8 in Sax-Zim from 1:30pm - 5:00pm
>
> I suppose I should also mention that i'll be guiding a friend from
> Texas up in that area on 1/30, so that will make 5 trips in 2 months...
>
> As for Pastor Al's questions:
>
> > Pastor all states: "However, I would like to further explore (through
> questions) one thought
> > expressed about not posting Boreal Owls due to potential stress,
> possibly
> > leading to further owl fatalities. I believe I understand the
> rationale,
> > but wonder if it can be validated. Does posting a rare bird
> generally or
> > inevitably lead to increased stress on the bird being observed, or is
> this
> > specific to certain owls (since information on Barn & Long-eared is
> also
> > withheld on some lists)? Does this stress indeed heighten the
> mortality
> > rate? Do we withhold posting because of the 1-2% that may act
> poorly? In a
> > related thought, should we always think of the bird first - or is
> there a
> > human factor that also needs to be considered (ie, has the pendulum
> swung
> > too far the other direction)?"
>
> I think the pendulum has swung way too far in one direction (and i'm
> not talking about thinking of the human factor, but rather thinking only
> of the bird first, and irrationally [ie: I won't stress it out if *I* go
> see it, but anyone else seeing it will cause it undue stress!]). I
> think in every state i've been in there is a group of people who feel
> that they are the only ones who should be allowed to see certain birds.
> The logic just falls apart eventually. If one decides "Species X won't
> be posted to the listserver", then what about species X+1 or X+2? If
> one bird shouldn't be posted because of "increased stress", what about
> all other birds? I submit to you, that posting a Summer Tanager, or
> Painted Bunting or Rock Wren, or Prairie Warbler, or whatever else in
> the spring/summer/fall, which people then flock to the spot, play tapes,
> pish, etc to find that rare bird creates similiar disturbance to posting
> an Owl location in the winter. I also submit that if your logic
> dictates that posting a location causes undue distress/disturbance, and
> this logic applies to multiple species of birds, then all locations of
> all birds should not be posted, by mathematical induction, and thus why
> do we have a list server at all?
>
> I believe you could also make the exact same argument with respect to
> stress on birds about those that band birds as you can about those that
> view birds. One can't honestly believe that capturing an Owl or any
> other bird in a net, taking it out of the net while it is struggling to
> get away, putting a band on its leg, and doing whatever other bizarre
> things people do (painting its head, tagging its wing, whatever
> disfiguration you feel suits you best) doesn't cause a lot of stress on
> the individual bird. So should we also stop banding all birds (i'd say
> yes, but i'm quite against banding), however there is some sound
> rationale and logic behind *some* (I emphasize some..as I think some
> banders do it for ego, not for scientific gain) banding. Some of it is
> quite helpful. Some of it is just all about ego.
>
> I, for one, will continue my birdwatching with the same respect, and
> the same admiration that i've always had.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Chris Fagyal
> Senior Software Engineer
> United Defense, L.P. ASD
> Fridley, MN
> (763) 572-5320
> chris.fagyal@udlp.com
>
> >>> Laura Erickson <bluejay@lauraerickson.com> 01/10/2005 21:39:41 PM
> >>>
> [snip]
>
> When I posted about how many owls I saw today, should I have added that
>
> this was the first time I've been to the bog in 2005, that I didn't
> stop or
> even slow down for hardly any of the owls I saw, and that I didn't
> flush a
> single one? This could make posts pretty unwieldy and defensive, and
> make
> us feel like we need to justify every element of our birding behavior
> from
> the moment we step out the door. Let's have a little faith in our
> fellow
> birders, and focus on minimizing our own impacts rather than
> questioning
> one another's right to be out there at all.
>
> [snip]
>
> Laura Erickson
> Duluth, MN
>
>
> Producer, "For the Birds" radio program
> <http://www.lauraerickson.com/>
>
> There is symbolic as well as actual beauty in the migration of
> birds. There is something infinitely healing in the repeated refrains
> of
> nature--the assurance that dawn comes after night, and spring after the
> winter.
>
> --Rachel Carson
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mou-net mailing list
> mou-net@cbs.umn.edu
> http://cbs.umn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mou-net
> _______________________________________________
> mnbird mailing list
> mnbird@lists.mnbird.net
> http://www.mnbird.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mnbird
>